Obama's Fiscal Summit Convenes At White House

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

LIZ SIDOTI | February 23, 2009 11:48 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
President Barack Obama points as he takes questions to close the Fiscal Responsibility Summit, Monday, Feb. 23, 2009 in the Old Executive Office Building at the White House in Washington. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

WASHINGTON — Urging strict future restraint even as current spending soars, President Barack Obama pledged on Monday to dramatically slash the skyrocketing annual budget deficit as he started to dole out the record $787 billion economic stimulus package he signed last week.

"If we confront this crisis without also confronting the deficits that helped cause it, we risk sinking into another crisis down the road," the president warned, promising to cut the yearly deficit in half by the end of his four-year term. "We cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences."

He said he would reinstitute a pay-as-you-go rule that calls for spending reductions to match increases and would shun what he said were the past few years' "casual dishonesty of hiding irresponsible spending with clever accounting tricks." He called the long-term solvency of Social Security "the single most pressing fiscal challenge we face by far" and said reforming health care, including burgeoning entitlement programs, was a huge priority.

Wall Street seemed unimpressed by all the talk. The Dow Jones industrials dropped 251 points for the day.

Obama goes before Congress and the nation Tuesday night to make the case for his agenda and his budget plans, which the White House is to release in more detail on Thursday.

On Monday, he sought to prepare people for tough choices ahead.

He summoned allies, adversaries and outside experts to what the White House characterized as a summit on the nation's future financial health one week after triumphantly putting his signature on the gargantuan spending-and-tax-cut measure designed to stop the country's economic free fall and, ultimately, reverse the recession now months into its second year.

At the same time, federal regulators announced a revamped program to shore up the nation's banks that could give the government increasing ownership. It was the administration's latest attempt to bolster the severely weakened banking system without nationalizing any institutions, which the White House has said it does not intend to do.

Story continues below
advertisement

Obama said there would be another summit next week on health care reform. "It's not that I've got summititis here," he added wryly.

By the president's account, the administration inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit for the current fiscal year from the Bush administration _ that's the figure Obama says he'll cut in half _ and the stimulus law, coupled with rescue efforts for ailing automakers, the financial industry and beleaguered homeowners will raise this year's red ink to $1.5 trillion.

The administration hopes to trim the deficit by scaling back Iraq war spending, raising taxes on the wealthiest and streamlining government.

"We are paying the price for these deficits right now," Obama said, estimating the country spends $250 billion _ one in every ten dollars of taxpayer money _ in interest on the national debt. "I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay."

As an example of a purchasing process "gone amok," the president said he had ordered a thorough review of his new fleet of Marine One helicopters, now far over budget. He was asked about the fleet by former presidential rival John McCain at the end of the White House meeting.

"The helicopter I have now seems perfectly adequate to me," Obama said, to laughter. "Of course, I've never had a helicopter before. So, you know, maybe I've been deprived and I didn't know it."

Earlier, Obama met with Republican and Democratic governors who are poised to benefit from his unprecedented emergency economic package. He told the chief executives, attending a three-day National Governors Association meeting in Washington, that he would begin distributing $15 billion to their states within two days to help them with Medicaid payments to the poor.

The recession has strapped state budgets, in particular in regard to the Medicaid program that is jointly underwritten by states and the federal government. In total, states will eventually receive $90 billion for Medicaid from the new law.

One month into office as the economy continues its downward spiral, Obama is seeking to balance twin priorities: turning around dismal conditions with a huge injection of spending while lowering huge budget deficits. With his re-election race just a few years away, he also has an interest in avoiding being labeled as a big-government, big-spending Democrat.

The White House meetings opened a jam-packed White House week that includes a State-of-the-Union-style address to Congress Tuesday night and the president's first budget proposal on Thursday. A common thread: addressing current economic turmoil while controlling the country's long-term costs.

"This will not be easy," Obama told his White House audience, which included congressional leaders, 2008 GOP presidential nominee McCain, and Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, who recently backed out as Obama's commerce secretary.

After Obama spoke, attendees broke into five groups to brainstorm how to address costly areas including military weapons, Social Security, health care and tax reform.

During one, Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said, "Our deficit really cannot be controlled until we figure out how to deal with health care costs." At another, House Republican leader John Boehner of Ohio proposed raising the Social Security retirement age to 70 over a number of years.

Afterward, Obama emphasized areas where he said there was agreement and consensus on moving forward in a bipartisan way, including that the country must ensure people have retirement security, that the tax process must be simplified and that the existing budgeting process isn't working. He also directed his team to pull together a final report from the sessions in 30 days.

____

Associated Press writers Jim Kuhnhenn, Jennifer Loven, Jeannine Aversa, Darlene Superville, Philip Elliott, Brett Blackledge and Erica Werner contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Urging strict future restraint even as current spending soars, President Barack Obama pledged on Monday to dramatically slash the skyrocketing annual budget deficit as he started to...
WASHINGTON — Urging strict future restraint even as current spending soars, President Barack Obama pledged on Monday to dramatically slash the skyrocketing annual budget deficit as he started to...
 
Comments
59
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
- SisterAnn I'm a Fan of SisterAnn 2 fans permalink



Social Security is our deferred wages, that we have paid in so we can retire starting at 62. If we retire at 62 we lose about one forth of our benefit. 66 is the full retirement age now, it is gradually being raised to age 67. It is all about choices. A lot of people get laid off in their sixties and it isn't easy to find a comparable job at that age, so it is a blessing that they can retire. People who want to work until 70, can and they get extra benefits. It is set up right the way it is.

If they increase the retirement age to 70 and eliminate retiring before 67, that would be a cruel thing to do, especially in today's job market. The elderly need to retire to give jobs to the young workers to support their families. Besides that, the government would grab the money and owe us that much more.

Experts say those who retire at 62 do not cost Social Security any more money because they get lower benefits. The lower benefit is worth it to those who have been laid off or who want to do something else before they are too decrepit to drive a car.

Workers would be the only group that would have to work until they are 70 and they would be paying for the early and lush retirements of the state and federal governments, plus the military and judicial system.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:38 AM on 02/27/2009
- Andy95 I'm a Fan of Andy95 2 fans permalink

Come on huff posters, isn't anybody going to call this fiscal responsibility summit a publicity stunt? Between TARP and ARRA, we just authorized $2T of new spending in the last 6 months. And we have no means to pay for it. Now we have a call for strict responsibility on future spending. Isn't it a bit late and disengenuous to be calling now for fiscal restraint. I applaud the vision but will a one say summit on one of the more challenging problems of our time accomplish anything more than a photo op? Please someone, tell me I'm wrong and help me understand this.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:33 AM on 02/24/2009

I like his method. That's real leadership. I think this is what he means by bipartisan. Getting together in small groups and focusing on a problem. Most of us cynics have come to see bipartisan as being a weakened version of a good idea.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:19 AM on 02/24/2009
- Kassandra I'm a Fan of Kassandra 95 fans permalink
photo

If they cut benefits at a time like this instead of making the wealthy pay their fair share for once.....people are gonna start dying.
Arianna was just on Olbermann and said that we progressives need to keep a close eye on what Obama does as he is continuing many of the Bush policies on rendition, This must change pretty soon as it is now abundantly clear that these policies have placed out troops in more danger and created much hate for the US around the world.

This SS "fix" better be in the interest of the people cause so much of the "stimulus was not due to the importance placed on "bi partisanship"
We don't have to get cynical, we just need to pay attention because as far as I'm concerned there are too many mixed messages coming out of this White House and too many "old hats' in the economic dept.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:38 PM on 02/23/2009
- Altruth I'm a Fan of Altruth 58 fans permalink

I am so proud of our new president. He has been President for less than 30 days and he has worked so hard and done so much. I really believe in him; I feel as though we have someone that will do right by us.

I also feel that the Republicans are doing all they can to make him fail, but they can't stop the good work. He has too many people here at home and abroad that are praying for him each day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:48 PM on 02/23/2009
- nirek I'm a Fan of nirek 84 fans permalink
photo

The more I hear from the President the MORE I like him. I am so very glad my vote was NOT wasted !President Obama makes me proud to be an American.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:57 PM on 02/23/2009
- dems08 I'm a Fan of dems08 173 fans permalink
photo

Is anyone else watching President Obama's q & a with dems and pubs in the white house right now (cnn and msnbc)?

One Senator stood up and thanked PO for holding the summit...

he then said that the last time dems and pubs were together at the wh like this was in 1997 (guess who was prez)...

ELEVEN YEARS AGO!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:27 PM on 02/23/2009

President Obama has sailed past the previous administration. I am impressed with how in previous years,meetings like this were normally held private. However, now these meeting have become available to the public. Now we can hold these politicians accountable..I learned a lot just listening and I believe we are heading in the right direction..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:22 PM on 02/23/2009
- dems08 I'm a Fan of dems08 173 fans permalink
photo

These meetings were not held during gw's years.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:28 PM on 02/23/2009
photo

The FICA tax limit is $90,000 which is ridiculously and ashamedly low. The last couple of years I worked I hit the limit so a research manager like me paid the same as a baseball player making $10,000,000/year. That shows the outright unfairness in the system. The payroll tax has always been the most regressive tax in the system. The problem is the theory is flawed for the limit because Social Security is supposed to be some kind of personal tax but since every generation pays past generation's retirement and Medicare this is pure fantasy. President Obama should just lift the limits on payroll tax and Social Security and Medicare will be funded for decades and we could afford universal health care.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 02/23/2009
- KeysDan I'm a Fan of KeysDan 23 fans permalink

For 2009 the social security payroll tax is 6.2 percent on the employee and employer (a total of 12.4 percent) on $106,800. Since the 1980 rescue plan for social security, much more money has been collected than has been paid out in benefits, and, hence, the huge surplus (remember the lock box discussions of 2000). Enough money is in the trust to pay all benefits until at least 204l, and then at least enough to pay up to 88 percent of benefits. However, the lock box has been unlocked and the trust raided, for general revenue, thereby making the deficits look better. The social security trust is issued government bonds to be paid pack as needed. Social security is hardly an emergency, given the economic crisis on almost every front--banking, jobs, housing, stock market. Bush tried to undo social security, and, got his knuckles rapped; I sure hope that Obama does not think he can get away with the same, just because he is a Democrat.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:04 PM on 02/23/2009
- LeighAnnes I'm a Fan of LeighAnnes 26 fans permalink

I hope he lifts the cap...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:01 PM on 02/23/2009
- nirek I'm a Fan of nirek 84 fans permalink
photo

Right on the mark! Think how much SS would get if the limits were lifted on Ballplayers and CEO's pay and bonuses. Maybe they would not like it , but they would be helping their fans and customers !

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 02/23/2009
- Enid I'm a Fan of Enid 9 fans permalink

DON'T TREAD ON ME !
Social Security is not a entitlement its insurance. We the worker are forced by law to pay for this coverage. Government realization that the majority of working people can not or do not save money they spend it. To avert this Social Security was formed. Its scoop has expanded but no one has ever been hurt by this program. Business hate SS because they pay a matching dollar to SS for every dollar you send to SS. A seven percent plus gain for the employer if we had no SS coverage. Leaving the worker with out a shirt at the end of their working life.
Taking the earnings cap off SS would resolve all the financial futures of the programs. Big money earners and their employers get away with this, why? They think it unfair but the few dollar they paid would not be miss and would right the system for all citizens.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:31 PM on 02/23/2009

In Europe it is difficult to us to understand as a as rich country as the USA do not exist a sanitary cover for all habitants. A society in which all do not have right to the health (to the life) and to the education is not a free society, since of beginning it does not allow that all inhabitants esten in equality of conditions to pogresar in the life.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:58 PM on 02/23/2009
- dems08 I'm a Fan of dems08 173 fans permalink
photo

Most Americans agree with you..

Stay tuned!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:29 PM on 02/23/2009
- Ron I'm a Fan of Ron 9 fans permalink

I'll wondering why they are just taxing the lower income for SS taxes, and why aren't they starting SS taxation again on anyoneone who makes over $250,000 and thay start paying SS taxes again. Its also interesting that retired people are forced to have the medicare system used as the primary insurance, when the retiree is still charged full insurance preminums for their secondary insurance. Large companies and insurance companies shouldn't be able to subsidize the SS system at our cost, while they still rake in all the benifits from the system. They should be forced to have their insurance as primary coverage first, or reduce their costs to the retiree by 80% until their coverage kicks in fully. Also they should look again at a lockbox approach to the SS funds. We haven't been underfunded as much as overly redistributed the money from our SS system to pay for other things. They bailed out Wall street executives, banking executives, now I wonder how soon they'll take money out of the pockets of people that need it the most. Also while they are in the mood for bailouts they need to prop up the funds for retirement accts insurance, and write new bills preventing retirements obligations with huge penalities when the money is funneled to individuals before bankrupcy's are started. Its no different then insider trading or dumping stocks just befor you know the value tanks.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:11 PM on 02/23/2009
- helonias I'm a Fan of helonias 222 fans permalink
photo

I wanna hear from the repubs about how SS would be today if we privatized it 4 years ago.

Tell us, or tell us why you don't want to talk about it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 PM on 02/23/2009
- LeighAnnes I'm a Fan of LeighAnnes 26 fans permalink

They would just lie or give you doubletalk. No way any of them admits they were wrong despite any amount of evidence.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:03 PM on 02/23/2009

Okay, everybody. Get ready to get Obama's back.

Social Security is sound, even in its current form, for another 40+ years. What other government program can you say that about? Easy fix: raise the cap again on amounts (and kinds?) of income taxed for Soc Security, and it's good forever.

Medicare and Medicaid? Restructure them to include anyone who wants in, let anyone who likes donating money to private insurer's profits and overpaid executives to keep doing so, structure it along the lines of EVERY OTHER industrial country..... AND SAVE HALF THE MONEY WE SPEND ON HEALTH CARE, while improving our health. Since universal, single payer has a long, proven track record, it's a no-brainer.

It's way past time to put our hard-earned money to work for our health and our health care providers, instead of for freeloading health "insurers" who sicken and kill Americans by denying treatment and coverage, saying "Your Money or Your LIFE!"

So get ready to organize and pressure our so-called federal representatives to make the well-to-do pay their fair share into Social Security (they can make it back by having elders $ to spend in the economy) and give us the universal, single payor, national health care system we deserve!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:14 PM on 02/23/2009
- Prakosh I'm a Fan of Prakosh 195 fans permalink
photo

WOW! You are really sailing into the wind aren't you! Yes We Can! Maybe? I don't think I would bet the farm!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:01 PM on 02/23/2009
- katekid I'm a Fan of katekid 2 fans permalink

I agree with Mary.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 02/23/2009

Amen, sister, so right on!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:53 PM on 02/23/2009
- jojojo I'm a Fan of jojojo 8 fans permalink

I largely agree. Soc Sec could also continue to slowly raise the age at which one can receive full benefits, as our life expectancy goes up. It's way higher than when the program started, so i think that's fair. And I've read--and I'm no expert--that the yearly cost of living increases have long been fixed to an index that has a higher increase than actual inflation rates. Sen. Pat Moynihan ( D-NY)was for all of these changes, including your notion of taxing a higher income. A little bit of all these, and I bet we'd have that one licked.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:19 PM on 02/23/2009
photo

As usual, they attack "entitlements" such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid yet besides the Iraqi parliament mandated withdrawal, say nothing about reducing military spending. This is the biggest ticket item in the budget and we are spending billions on unneeded weapons programs, 702 military bases worldwide, and private contractors, yet neglecting the needs of the common soldier and huge amounts of waste and fraud.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 PM on 02/23/2009
- Enid I'm a Fan of Enid 9 fans permalink

Social Security is not a entitlement its insurance. We the worker are forced by law to pay for this coverage. Government realization that the majority of working people can not or do not save money they spend it. To avert this Social Security was formed. Its scoop has expanded but no one has ever been hurt by this program. Business hate SS because they pay a matching dollar to SS for every dollar you send to SS. A seven percent plus gain for the employer if we had no SS coverage. Leaving the worker with out a shirt at the end of their working life.
Taking the earnings cap off SS would resolve all the financial futures of the programs. Big money earners and their employers get away with this, why? They think it unfair but the few dollar they paid would not be miss and would right the system for all citizens.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:29 PM on 02/23/2009
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect